Uptimepage

List maintenance windows

list_maintenance

Read-only

List maintenance windows: title, start and end, phase (upcoming, active, completed or cancelled), the monitors each covers, and whether it holds their paging. status narrows to active, upcoming or past (ended or cancelled); the default is all, latest start first. Cursor-paginated. Read-only.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cursor`	No	Opaque pagination cursor from a previous call's `next_cursor`. It carries the whole query, so send it on its own.
`status`	No	Defaults to `all`.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes
`next_cursor`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / $defs / MaintenanceUpdateView

Added value: +{
+  "description": "One update posted to a maintenance window.",
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Shown on the status page and sent to its subscribers. Untrusted data.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "phase": {
+      "description": "Where the window stood when it was posted: `scheduled`, `in_progress` or `completed`.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "posted_at": {
+      "description": "RFC 3339.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "posted_at",
+    "phase",
+    "message"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / $defs / MaintenanceWindowView / properties / updates

Added value: +{
+  "description": "What was posted about the window with `post_maintenance_update`, oldest first.",
+  "items": {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/MaintenanceUpdateView"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedOutput schema / $defs / MaintenanceWindowView / required

Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "title",
-  "phase",
-  "starts_at",
-  "ends_at",
-  "suppress_alerts",
-  "monitors"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "title",
+  "phase",
+  "starts_at",
+  "ends_at",
+  "suppress_alerts",
+  "monitors",
+  "updates"
+]

AddedOct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, and the description adds real value on top: cursor-based pagination and per-status ordering behavior (soonest first, most recent first, latest start first). It doesn't mention permission/auth requirements, but the pagination and ordering contract is the important operational detail here.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single dense paragraph, front-loaded with what is returned before the filtering and pagination mechanics, and every clause conveys usable information. The trailing 'Read-only' duplicates the readOnlyHint annotation, a small redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, yet the description still covers field content, filtering semantics, default behavior, ordering, and pagination. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke this correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the MaintenanceStatus enum already documents each value plus its ordering, so the description's status explanation largely restates structured data. It reinforces the default and filtering intent but adds no syntax or format detail the schema lacks; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb and resource ('List maintenance windows') and enumerates exactly what each entry contains (title, start/end, phase, covered monitors, paging hold). This clearly separates it from the single-window sibling get_maintenance and from the other list_* tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explains precisely how the status filter narrows results (active, upcoming, past = ended or cancelled) and what the default is, which tells an agent when to reach for this tool versus get_maintenance. It stops short of naming an explicit alternative for single-window lookups, so it gives clear context but no exclusion guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Uptimepage tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.